You might also be interested in
Replies (8)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Yes, it's all about the big picture. Strategic thinkers. Maybe this is a chance for us nerdy, detail-focused people to highlight the importance of reading stuff. The devil is in the detail.
Well, I have just glanced through the due diligence report and have to admit it is pretty impenetrable. Not surprised she never read it. How much do KPMG get paid for this sort of thing?
I had a quick look at it. I work in a small software company and the issues mentioned in the report make sense to me, possibly because the issues and jargon are relevant to such companies.
Separately, the lack of understanding of culture is noticeable and implies that KPMG UK weren't much involved. E.g. in the glossary, HMRC is given as "Her majesty's revenue and customs" (no caps after first word) but IRS is given as "Internal Revenue Service". Later, there is reference to "The HMRC". (I'm not British but even I know these things.)
And how could anyone have concluded that Autonomy was worth $10.3 billion?
I've just flipped through the due diligence and would not suggest proceeding without better information - there are warnings all through it e.g. Key Findings 3, et seq. The document is a bit difficult, but it is inexcusable not to have read it thoroughly and not to have provided the Board with the CFO's initial comments at least, together with a copy. (It is possible this acquisition might have been someone's pet project, so whatever warnings were given would be ignored. There is still no excuse!)
£8.5 Billion and no one appears to have read a initial DD report that sates quite clearly it has severe limitations that need to be addressed in the full report.
As has been said "Strategic thinking" appears to have ruled and if I got an impenetrable report I would have asked for it to be made understandable.
The first sentence of the letter states that KPMG's report is preliminary and subject to further work. And no more was done apparently.
I have always been suspicious of, unusually senior, people who say that they only look at the "big picture". Sometimes you need to understand the detail in depth in order to see a wider view.
In this case for example there is very little DD on tax as KPMG were not allowed access to the company's external advisers. At the very least you would want to know why as there might be a host of problems when you raise the bonnet, which in turn could affect other areas of the business.
Due diligence reports are by their nature, not easy to read and dull as ditchwater. But you're the client, if it's really impenetrable, ask for clarification or an executive summary. If you think that's expensive, see what it costs if you don't do proper due diligence.
How much was KPMG paid to produce a report that no-one read and no-one understood? If the report wasn't fit for purpose they should have engaged another firm. I only hope this CFO is not a member of my professional body